Interventions of Stigma and Discrimination Towards HIV/AIDS Patients: An Integrative Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
HIV / AIDS is a chronic disease that has gained stigma and discrimination. Various attempts had been made by the government to reduce this stigma and discrimination. This paper identified the critical components of interventions with the aim to decrease stigma and discrimination of PLWHA. This integrative literature review was conducted in the databases PubMed and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017. Finally, 6 studies were found in CINAHL and 2 studies from PubMed. Results revealed that the most interventions were creating a program with a specific designation that aimed to change behavior. Interventions were developed base on diffusion and innovation theory, social cognitive theory, socioeconomic and community theory. Sample articles provided information the positive results, such as 1) decreasing of stigma toward PLWHA from community member, community leader, health worker, community to the family with PLWHA, also from family to PLWHA, 2) improving PLWHA self-esteem, 3) decreasing uncertainty about HIV treatment among PLWHA, 4) increasing institutional support in the hospital, and 5) increasing of HIV knowledge. For further needed programs involving multiple levels of respondents/participants (PLWHA, community, government, organization, health worker, social worker) in one moment and implemented at least 1 year, by combining behavior change techniques through education, social marketing, and community/group organizational development. Keywords: Interventions of stigma, Discrimination, HIV/AIDS
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".